- Joined
- Nov 9, 2018
- Messages
- 986
- Reaction score
- 930
- Location
- Rainham, Medway (North Kent) UK
- Hive Type
- National
- Number of Hives
- 44 plus 17 managed for another
The original cartoons are quite funny.
I agree with all of this; I'd just be a little wary of saying or implying that (wild) honeybees don't need conservation efforts as they are not endangered due to beekeeping. I am not here intending to open up another AMM type thread, but in many other species domestication and selective breeding, and beekeepers do exert a selection pressure, even if not deliberately done, has lead to concerns about a narrowing of the gene pool. For example in many crop plants there is now considerable interest in their their wild relatives and their conservation as in the face of increasing threats, eg from climate change they may well labour useful genetics which hitherto have not been valued in their domesticated cousins.Whilst I accept that pollinators in general (including many of our native bee species - bumbles and solitary bees) are in dire straits there is no evidence that honey bees are in decline in the UK and need any sort of assistance other than that currently offered by the myriad numbers of hobbyist and commercial beekeepers alike. You could argue that truly wild (ie: not in the care of a beekeeper) colonies of honey bees are more of a rarity than they were a couple of centuries ago but we have developed a symbiotic relationship with these insects and any reduction in wild colonies is more than compensated for by 'kept' bees. If honey bees did not enjoy or appreciate the homes and attention they are given by beekeepers then they would not continue to live in our hives. Honeybees are still independent, partially wild, creatures and we have all experienced colonies who take exception to what we have on offer.
The OP of the original thread to which this thread refers started off with the premise that she felt (from her research) that honey bees were in need of conservation. It was a flawed premise - if she had been talking about other bee species I would have been the first to agree.
The 'tensions' arose because views were presented that were based in a misinformed position to start with that was then compounded by a suggestion that a novel and innovative 'bottle hive' may be a suitable container in which to keep bees. This was appropriately challenged.
So, yes, in some respects there is a difference in perspective but there is no requirement for anyone to be understanding or accepting of a perspective that has serious flaws. A flawed idea is a flawed idea - you can wrap it up in kind words and understanding but, at the end of the day, a bad idea is a bad idea.
That's a considered and interesting perspective. .. it's going to be impossible after the multiple introductions of other strains of bees over the last 150 years (and of course the decimation of AMM as a result of the IOW disease in 1913) to ever see a situation where 'wild' bees in the UK are going to be anything other than feral mongrels. There are still isolated pockets, apparently, of near true AMM and protected status of these areas will ensure that they remain but ... the prospect of ever being able to influence our non-kept colonies, in general, is nothing more than a pipe dream IMO.I agree with all of this; I'd just be a little wary of saying or implying that (wild) honeybees don't need conservation efforts as they are not endangered due to beekeeping. I am not here intending to open up another AMM type thread, but in many other species domestication and selective breeding, and beekeepers do exert a selection pressure, even if not deliberately done, has lead to concerns about a narrowing of the gene pool. For example in many crop plants there is now considerable interest in their their wild relatives and their conservation as in the face of increasing threats, eg from climate change they may well labour useful genetics which hitherto have not been valued in their domesticated cousins.
Whilst I accept that pollinators in general (including many of our native bee species - bumbles and solitary bees) are in dire straits there is no evidence that honey bees are in decline in the UK and need any sort of assistance other than that currently offered by the myriad numbers of hobbyist and commercial beekeepers alike. You could argue that truly wild (ie: not in the care of a beekeeper) colonies of honey bees are more of a rarity than they were a couple of centuries ago but we have developed a symbiotic relationship with these insects and any reduction in wild colonies is more than compensated for by 'kept' bees. If honey bees did not enjoy or appreciate the homes and attention they are given by beekeepers then they would not continue to live in our hives. Honeybees are still independent, partially wild, creatures and we have all experienced colonies who take exception to what we have on offer.
The OP of the original thread to which this thread refers started off with the premise that she felt (from her research) that honey bees were in need of conservation. It was a flawed premise - if she had been talking about other bee species I would have been the first to agree.
The 'tensions' arose because views were presented that were based in a misinformed position to start with that was then compounded by a suggestion that a novel and innovative 'bottle hive' may be a suitable container in which to keep bees. This was appropriately challenged.
So, yes, in some respects there is a difference in perspective but there is no requirement for anyone to be understanding or accepting of a perspective that has serious flaws. A flawed idea is a flawed idea - you can wrap it up in kind words and understanding but, at the end of the day, a bad idea is a bad idea.
Do you mean wild honey bees or wild bees or both?I have to say therefore that I disagree with your premise. Wild bees do need taking care of, just as the whole ecology does.
Thanks - see attached if you are interested in looking further at the plant side of things Crop Wild Relatives: Plant conservation for food security - NERR037That's a considered and interesting perspective. ..
Yes, we are talking about honeybees, but of course other wild bee species also need our care.Do you mean wild honey bees or wild bees or both?
And how does commercial honey production exist alongside ?
I see an old thread has resurfaced and browsing through it I came across this which pretty well sums up my thoughts.I do agree there are some snappy replies to questions on here that would probably be better not said but we all tap the keyboard without thinking sometimes.
I think the indication on how good this Forum is is the quantity of posts and the number of contributors. Most forums that I belong to seem to have a couple of posts a day at their busiest. - maybe that's just me!,,,,,,
What tensions?How commercial honeybee operation exists alongside is where the (main) tensions arise.
For example, people making a living from their bees are unlikely to want people beekeeping carelessly near them - the threat of disease would be a cause for concern.What tensions?
Firstly we live on a tiny island, whether you are a hobbyist or bee farmer, if you are registered with beebase, you will note that there can be over 100 apiary sites within 10 Km of your site. The information is anonymous, but, by your thinking then there would have to be tensions between hobbyists, some of which could be beekeeping carelessly near you. This is one reason why we have bee inspectors, inspecting apiaries in known areas of disease outbreaks. Bee farmers can be DASH accredited by the NBU. If they meet the requirements, they are allowed to self regulate.For example, people making a living from their bees are unlikely to want people beekeeping carelessly near them - the threat of disease would be a cause for concern.
People wanting to see bees able to live independently on the other hand will not be keen on foriegn and treatment-dependent strains, as they dilute the local adapted genetics.
Both those positions can be generalised - group x doesn't like the idea of what group y wants to do and vice versa.
However: since this root tension is often unrecognised we get in a muddle, and start fighting among ourselves.
Those "locally adapted genes" have a mixed history. I assume you have heard of Isle of Wight disease?For example, people making a living from their bees are unlikely to want people beekeeping carelessly near them - the threat of disease would be a cause for concern.
People wanting to see bees able to live independently on the other hand will not be keen on foriegn and treatment-dependent strains, as they dilute the local adapted genetics.
Both those positions can be generalised - group x doesn't like the idea of what group y wants to do and vice versa.
However: since this root tension is often unrecognised we get in a muddle, and start fighting among ourselves.
Yes they do. Yes I have. How does this bear on my point?Those "locally adapted genes" have a mixed history. I assume you have heard of Isle of Wight disease?
Your answer only provides one group.Hobbyists can be split into the same groups: primarily concerned about their bees, or primarily concerned about the genetics (and conditions) that allow wild bees to exist.
What is a curate's egg?? Never heard that expression.
Your answer only provides one group.
We are all concerned about our bees, this in essence includes genetics and conditions to our local environs, otherwise we would have dead bees.
You talk of treatment dependent strains, once you move bees/queens out of an area of non treatment, the next generation will be relying on the drones local to that area and will lose the traits from the mother queen.
As hobbyists, we cannot flood the area with enough drones to meet our personal preferences/requirements and inevitably we end up buying more and more queens to satisfy our needs. We end up chasing our tails!
Enter your email address to join: